> Italy and Denmark have spearheaded a call for a “new interpretation” of the European Convention on Human Rights. Experts say it’s a political move that raises questions about judicial independence.
> The push for more restrictive migration policies from some European governments has pivoted toward Europe’s top human rights court. Spearheaded by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her Danish counterpart, Mette Frederiksen, **nine European Union member states have penned an open letter calling for a reinterpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights to make it easier to “expel foreign national criminals.”**
>The leaders’ exact demands are unclear. The signatories say their goal is to “launch a new and open-minded conversation” rather than elicit quick legal changes. But the move in itself is controversial, sparking questions about judicial independence in Europe and the legal architecture designed to protect human rights.
> In the open letter dated May 22, nine European states call for “more room” to “decide on when to expel criminal foreign nationals” and “more freedom” to track “criminal foreigners who cannot be deported.” The states also say they “need to be able to take effective steps” against “hostile states” that are “instrumentalizing migrants.”
>”The world has changed fundamentally since many of our ideas were conceived,” they write. “We now live in a globalized world where people migrate across borders on a completely different scale.”
>”We believe that the development in the court’s interpretation has, in some cases, limited our ability to make political decisions in our own democracies,” the letter reads.
Dancedancedance1133 on
I like migration as much as anyone on this sub but I like democracy a little more. Denmark shows that it’s something specific about asylum migration that pulls people towards the extreme right
2 Comments
> Italy and Denmark have spearheaded a call for a “new interpretation” of the European Convention on Human Rights. Experts say it’s a political move that raises questions about judicial independence.
> The push for more restrictive migration policies from some European governments has pivoted toward Europe’s top human rights court. Spearheaded by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and her Danish counterpart, Mette Frederiksen, **nine European Union member states have penned an open letter calling for a reinterpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights to make it easier to “expel foreign national criminals.”**
>The leaders’ exact demands are unclear. The signatories say their goal is to “launch a new and open-minded conversation” rather than elicit quick legal changes. But the move in itself is controversial, sparking questions about judicial independence in Europe and the legal architecture designed to protect human rights.
> In the open letter dated May 22, nine European states call for “more room” to “decide on when to expel criminal foreign nationals” and “more freedom” to track “criminal foreigners who cannot be deported.” The states also say they “need to be able to take effective steps” against “hostile states” that are “instrumentalizing migrants.”
>”The world has changed fundamentally since many of our ideas were conceived,” they write. “We now live in a globalized world where people migrate across borders on a completely different scale.”
>”We believe that the development in the court’s interpretation has, in some cases, limited our ability to make political decisions in our own democracies,” the letter reads.
I like migration as much as anyone on this sub but I like democracy a little more. Denmark shows that it’s something specific about asylum migration that pulls people towards the extreme right